Deutsche Telekom W700V GPL violation

[Sebastian Gottschall]

ard schrieb:
> Hello,
>
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 02:00:16AM +0200, Sebastian Gottschall wrote:
>   
>> [ipriv]:    Usage: iwpriv interface [private-command [private-arguments]]
>>                interface [roam {on|off}]
>>                  interface [port {ad-hoc|managed|N}]
>>  Not yet implemented...
>> The command %s need exactly %d argument...
>> Interface doesn't accept private ioctl...
>>  %s (%X): %s
>>    Invalid command : %s
>>   Invalid private ioctl definition for
>> (and others)
>>
>> which shows that the linux wireless tools are compiled in
>>     
>
> As others said: I don't think that is evidence. It merely states
> that they are using an OS that also implements ioctl's and uses
> wireless.
> Besides that: if it uses iwpriv in some way: that code has been
> around for so long that you might be able to trace it back to a
> non GPL fork.
>   
not just iwpriv. but even if its available a long time, it doesnt change 
the license
>   
>> additionally the vendor ported madwifi to his own operating system and  
>> included the wireless extension interface which is part of the linux  
>> this can be proved with other text patterns too
>>     
>
> Well, madwifi for one is licensed under f.i. BSD. It doesn't
> steal any extension interface (you actually can't steal an
> interface, unless you believe in patents).
>
>   
>> since the firmware uses slot of linux based drivers (non gpl drivers  
>> like madwifi and others), its also very likelly that other parts of the  
>> linux kernel are stolen
>>     
>
> Most vendors deliver drivers that can be used under a
> licensing "as you see fit", since good support means it will be
> sold more and that means $$$.
>
>   
>> to build up this non gpl'ed operating system
>>     
>
> There is a difference between stealing and thinking alike.
>
>   
>> for sure there is no sourcecode provided for anything
>>     
>
> But you have the binaries. Which I wanted to check too, but I
> have no way of examining the .bin file.
> Can you make the extracted file available? I am also curious.
> Next to that, you might be able to document your findings in a
> wiki. Do not use the wording "stolen" in any way, just show the
> parts were you think some code has been (ab)used.
>
> As others say (and especially since we regularly see
> violation reports which in fact were no violations): we don't
> want to see SCO cases ;-). I think it is better to let a
> GPL-violation go, than to have a bad image.
>   
here the link to the binary

http://www.dd-wrt.com/fw-sp-w700v-ipone-b-3_22_000-1_unpacked.bin

> Regards,
> Ard van Breemen
>
>
>